Neo

We share a lot after your five year head start. The popping cup sound in the hallways will be with me forever. I was in the AUD! Thank you.

I think Pi was referring to not finishing something. That's how I took it. For the record, I'm not in the debate. This is a public service attempt to bridge understandings. Carry on.

We all three agree. Political discussion is discussion around many ideological issues, finance, rights, and responsibilities all included, among other things. I'm not sure who, if anyone, said anything different or arrogantly. Perhaps "arrogant" applied to no one. A wise poster warned us all about labeling earlier today. Perhaps "incomplete" or "narrow" would've been better words. I try always to respond to your posts. Here's to effort! I wrote as much as I know in a back and forth over several days last fall. I'll spare you all the column inches and refer you back, in this post. The only person "against" minimum wage fixes are people who think they don't work. Heck, make it $100 thousand a year. It raises costs, dollar for dollar, regressive ly among those least able to pay. Talk about minimum skills, the real minimum wage problem, and you'll get my attention. The problem with a society that believes stocking shelves is a family supporting skill is that very belief, not the wage.

Better said!

I get your point that it's competing interests, but it's so much more than competing interests. My interests are well known to me, and subordinate when I talk government. If good government and my interests align, that's kismet.

I used a lot of words. I'll give you the last word!

I think Marino was the best thrower ever. Who knows how good any of his running backs were. He wouldn't run.

Chuck, sorry ... My brief outline regarding rhetorical devices was incomplete. In addition, you'll see progressives conflate "deny" with "refuse to pay for". Some ten years ago, or so, someone figured out that accusing someone of "denying" somebody something makes them appear to be a bad person. Expecting them to pay for themselves, of course, does not. Remember Sandra Fluke? She was asked to speak at a convention about being denied birth control. Of course, she wasn't denied anything. She wanted someone else to buy it for her. Saying she didn't want to buy it herself and someone should buy it for her was, in her mind, distasteful. Instead, she claimed it was being denied. Bad people deny others. You'll be accused of that. You are, of course, denying nobody nothing. Hold firm. The rhetoric's weak sauce. Ask Mr. D - "What, exactly, am I denying?" He'll not answer. If he asks, instead, "are you saying you're not going to pay for everyone", you can say "correct" and still be a good person. He'll not ask the second question. It's distasteful because it strips him of demonizing you for denying anything and forces him to address "I want you to pay for me". Combine "I want you to pay for me" with "everything good is a right" and you get ..... well, you know what we get. Next chapter - "the help of others". Rhetoric 102. A progressive leaps from rhetorical device to rhetorical device until you tire.

I'm sure everyone's seen this ... But just in case ...

I really like Mary Katharine Ham.

Oh, yes you can .... but first you have to make yourself comfortable that you're only taking it because the other person has it illegitimately. You are, after all, a good person who's figured things out on behalf of others. Routes to this include demonizing the other person by calling him bad or lucky (lucky is a subset of bad - roll with me, here). If that fails, point out that his activities in accumulating stuff were evil and required the coercion or subordination of others. If this, too, fails, point to 19th century slavery. "Mean spirited" and "something-phobe" and "-ist" are rhetorical friends. Diminish the person, and his goods are fair game. If you can't do any of these, you have to concede that you're taking it just because you want to and because you can. This is distasteful. Fortunately, few call us out on the philosophical and rhetorical contortions necessary to avoid this. My firm is evil and uses me to profit. I profit, too. I'm done with it! Where do I sign up for stuff? I feel like a better person, already.

Mr D could have a very insightful observation, yes sir. I don't think Marchand's shot was pedestrian, but I'm not sure he beat Lehner at his best, either.

I'm in! Spectacular idea.

Well, then, my friend, embrace profit, big business, growth, and low taxes ... and feed your rights. I'm with you! Everything for all! Psst, where do they store it? Let's find a rich guy and take his hospital! An isolationist, too! I'll send you Rand Paul bumper stickers. I recall (do I? keep me honest, I've mixed up posts, on occasion) you fantasizing about going to war with an army and slaying big businesseses and their managers. Hands, biting, feeding, and all that .... Big business .... A progressive's teat! I see squirming! Profit, mothers' milk. Blood money spends just fine. I'm being a smart ass. My point, though, stands in my mind. Progressivism is 100 years old. Yawn. You want stuff? You work and grow stuff. Or, if you choose not to, at least be civil to those setting the table where you dine.

Of interest, from you, to me ... What adaptation is necessary on the right and accomplished on the left? Sanders is warmed over socialism from the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s (respite, 1980s to 2010s). It gave us ... Europe and Greece where it worked, and the Soviet Union and Red China where it didn't. Hilary is trying to out Bernie "Bernie". At least socialists in the 30s and 40s had yet to see the evidence that it doesn't work very well. I'll call them hopeful, if naive. I'm not sure what to call a socialist today. We all have different views, of course .... but what "adaptation" are you seeing in the Democratic party that you're not seeing in the Republican party? I find one of the more enlightening aspects of this election, and it's been a trend for a decade, is that the "tired, old" label has moved to the Democratic party. Unless you define "new idea" as "new entitlement paid for by others", the Dems have been stuck for decades. I'm a hip, cool, crazy wild man .... Republican! Try 'n' keep up, kids .... Separate thought separate thought separate thought ....... Tangent .... for those who truly want - desire, believe in - expanded programs and government and entitlements (respectfully), you'd BETTER vote pro growth Republican .... there's ONE hope for an inexhaustible appetite for gifts and benefits ... and it's an inexhaustible growth engine. Health Care's a RIGHT, Education's a RIGHT, Unemployment's a right, living wages are RIGHTS .... well, you'd better lower taxes and limit regulations and pray those evil profits double, triple, quadruple ... 'cuz you're in need of one huge teat, baby, to suckle for generations. Of all the ideas of others I hold and don't hold, the "business is bad and must be taxed and regulated" juxtaposed with the "this and that are good and rights and must be provided". This, my friends, is the slow death suicide prescription. I'm starving, slaughter the farmers! Republicans, a Democrat's only hope! (duck)

I see Pink Martini is coming to Buffalo .... I am very, very, envious ... Select Amado Mio and Sympathique .... to start!

Well done ... you cranked my unintended softball out of the park!

By the way ... I think Marchand is one great hockey player. The whole is unique.

... and Shawna ... "What's yo' fan ta sy?

Can you imagine the glorious scene? The smirking uber-villain Marchand, presenting his palms to officials with his copywrited incredulous, bewildered look ... cheering chowder heads coming to the conclusion that something's up, one by one .... TV Jack miss-explaining the action with a half grasp of rules, full grasp of homerism, and a cup-runneth over need to keep talking .... Players milling about while officials converse within earshot of captains ... the Sabres captain turning and skating away, tapping his stick on the ice ... Marchand looking like someone tried to explain Sudoko to him .... The goal waved off and a penalty awarded to the Sabres ... Lehner waving his stick and returning to his crease like Thor waved a sword and returned to his throne ... and Matty Mou potting the GW power play goal .... and one last look at the always angry and befuddled Claude Julian.

Lightbulb of awareness - How many times must I have done that?!

Perhaps the palms were torn away by the hook.

You are learned. I was not a poster during Varada's tenure. I was a fan. No assignment, but do you (or others) have a view on Vaclav's value?

I wondered, last night, what penalty was called in OT. On television, the penalty shot was identified, but not the penalty, itself. I went to NHL dotcom. It was a hooking call. Hooking ...

I was half expecting it! Classic ...